Of course Adam's sin is imputed to EVERYONE. But Christ died for everyone, which so far, you haven't addressed.
Yes, but Christ's work on the cross only becomes effective to the believer.
How can God hold them accountable for what they don't have the ability to accept OR reject? That doesn't make sense and is not a reasonable view.
If I was born in medieval Cambodia and never heard of Christ because the region was unreached, was I saved by default? Lack of knowledge is not a reasonable explanation, otherwise missionary work would not be imperative, as made clear in Scripture. The universal testimony of Scripture is that "all" are under sin, and the words "but" and "besides" don't appear next to "all."
So, you really didn't look up the Isa passage, huh.
You quoted it and I went to show how you are misunderstanding the terminology in both passages.
It has NO bearing on original sin. Yes, all are born corrupted by Adam's sin. But accountability for one's sin occurs when one "knows enough" to refuse the evil and choose the good. Infants do NOT "know enough" to do that.
The "age of accountability" is not a biblical doctrine, however, It has been invented by man, because the idea of little children being accountable for sin is repugnant to many. However, we should conform our minds to a biblical view, not conform the Bible to a man-centered view.
Everyone is free to their opinion, but it seems to me that you have ignored the significance of Isa 7:15-16.
How in the world can Isa 7:15-16 refer to this, given that it was said of Jesus Christ?? He did NOT have a sin nature. So your application is incorrect, not mine.
I was really hoping to avoid getting into "Christology," as I find it very divisive and confusing, but I can tell you the little I know that pertains to what you are quoting in Isaiah. It is my opinion, that Christ is God, that even as an infant though trapped in a human body He had all the knowledge that God has. The human soul is not confined to the neurochemical limitations of a 2 month old brain, and being that Christ is divine, surely as a baby He was fully God made flesh. That's why he was able not each even as young as 12 years old.
So, I don't think that Isa 7:15-16 really applies to Jesus himself, but specifically to the direct fulfillment in Isaiah 8:3 with the birth of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. In fact, the prophecy continues on to tell about how the King of Assyria will bring destruction before that baby is of age.
What you are confusing is that in biblical prophecy, especially when it pertains to Jesus, the prophecy exists within a different prophecy that merely foreshadows the event accomplished in Christ.
This is very common in the Bible. You can still read the story of Sarah and Hagar apart from the interpretation in Galatians 4, but you just don't get the whole story about in their lives is a testimony concerning the old and new covenants. Furthermore, you can read Hosea where it says "out of Egypt I called my son," and even though it applies to Jesus as Matthew points out, it also applies to the Israel of the Exodus in the context in Hosea. So, to apply Is 7:15-16 to Jesus specifically is like applying verse 2 of Hosea 11 to Jesus, which is obviously not the case.
Lastly, being that Jesus did not have a human father, by a divine mystery he was not imputed Adam's sin.
However, God's system of sacrifice in the OT included sacrifices for unintentional sin. There wasn't for intentional sin. I'm NOT saying that infants don't sin. That isn't the issue. Why? Because Christ died for ALL sins. That includes all the infants. Their sins have been paid for.
Christ's sacrifice only becomes effective upon belief, however.
When they "know enough" to understand the gospel message, then God DOES hold them accountable for whether they "refuse the evil and choose the good".
Again, the terms "refuse the evil..." do not endorse a doctrine pertaining to a supposed age of accountability. The verse you quote does not even discuss that. Please show me how it does or do not use it, because the age thing was a way of Isaiah telling the king of judea when events were going to unfold, not to explain how babies are saved by Christ.
Please check a lexicon. The word for "children" means "youth/childhood/young people". NOT infants.
Again "no one is righteous, not one" includes babies, the passages in Genesis reflect all of mankind, God killed all of mankind in the flood, He did not spare babies. THis is the smoking gun, because the passages about the inclination of man's heart being continually evil obviously is the precursor to the flood as punishment. There is a necessary connection between the punishment and the deserved nature of it to all that are punished by it.
By applying your view to life, then NO infants or the mentally disabled will go to heaven. Is that your view?
It would appear to me that they were not predestined, yet they are imputed sin.
Until a person "knows enough" to understand and either refuse or choose God's free gift of eternal life, they AREN'T accountable for their lack of faith.
Where does the Bible say that anyone is not accountable? It seems to me an invention of man, such an idea, I cannot find it in His revelation.
If you disagree, please explain a situation where someone is held accountable for actions that they had no knowledge of.
This happens all the time. People born in a promiscuous and materialistic society will discount the very real evils that taking part in these things spawns. But, I will ground us in a Biblical example:
The high priest Ananias commanded those standing beside him to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Do you sit to try me according to the Law, and in violation of the Law order me to be struck?” But the bystanders said, “Do you revile God’s high priest?” And Paul said, “I was not aware, brethren, that he was high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’” (Acts 23:2-5)
So, Paul committed wrong, even though until he was corrected, he didn't know that he did. When he was told and then became aware, he apologized. So, Paul was held accountable, even before he had the knowledge, by his own admission.
---
I think the real danger with ignoring the clear teaching that all unbelievers are under condemnation is that then the Gospel becomes obscured. All of us are blind in our sin, born into and live it from the day of birth. There was nothing in me that loved God when I was born, and not loving God is sin. I knew nothing about what was good or evil, but by necessity was born selfish for the sake of survival. The human condition is sin, through and through. Apart from this understanding of the human condition, what is the Gospel even saving people from?
thanks
